... because Barack Obama announced in a recent interview that he's...
A.) going to be sworn in by his whole name, "Barack Hussein Obama", when he's sworn in. I think he's intending it to be a sign that he's not hiding or backing away from his multi-cultural heritage.
and
B.) he's going to make "a major speech in an Islamic capital".
He's looking at all of this as an opportunity to "reboot" American foreign policy and American relations with the Muslim world. You can read the whole article here, in an online article by the recently Chapter 11'd Chicago Tribune. (Good to see them still churning out news, despite massive lay-offs and it's recent death knell. Maybe their in denial. I would be.)
I see what Obama is doing here. He's delivering on the promises of "change" that he promised in his campaign. After all, his predecessor launched a vaguely-defined, international war against... what was the term... "religious extremists" or something like that. (Pot, Kettle, Black.) Obama seems to be taking the exactly oppostite tactic here, reaching out to Islamic world, suggesting that he knows that Christians and Muslims haven't been well-represented by their most vocal representatives, lo these seven years now. And that new opportunity for progress and growth is present for the first time in a long time. That's a message that I think he needs to give. That's what a leader does, leads people to smarter, healthier, more constructive attitudes and practices.
He also says very clearly what his attitudes are in quotes like this...
"The message I want to send is that we will be unyielding in stamping out the terrorist extremism we saw in Mumbai," Obama said, adding that he plans to give a major address in an Islamic capital as part of his global outreach.
So, he's unwilling to accept terrorism as a manipulation technique by the fanatics of the world. But he's open to working with the 95% of peaceful muslims in the rest of the world. A win/ win tactic - tough on terrorism/ welcoming to peace.
And yet...
I see headlines like
"Barack Obama plans to reach out to Muslim world"
and
I read that he's going to make a major speech in an islamic capital
and
read about his intention of recognizing his "Hussein"-ness
and
I think about this...

and I remember this...
and this...

and I think to myself, "there are large patches of this country which aren't going to understand what he's trying to do here. This is not going to happen easily for him or for this country." If you were one of the people who, during the longest campaign in American History, were afraid that Obama was going to "turn the country all muslim" or "outlaw the bible" or "let the muslims in to the white house", then this announcement from him will unintentionally play right into your worst fears.
So, how do you balance a good and presidentially appropriate action against the unapologetic, only slightly supressed racism and ignorance of your most fearful citizens?
I would suggest a single tactic.
"Control the language of your actions"
This comes staight out of George Lakoff's "Don't think of an elephant". And it's the tactic that the right has used successfully to spin liberals into a twist and get a C+ alcoholic male cheerleader and failed businessman into the presidential office for eight years. It's a tactic that the left can employ to big success.
Right now, "islam" and "muslim" are negative buzzwords. Right or wrong, that's just the way that it is. My advice to Obama would be to continue with his plans, don't change a thing about his intentions, but focus less on the "muslim-targeted" language of his plans and make them more universal. Speak in the inclusive double-talk of the modern media.
Instead of "giving a major speech in an islamic capital", try "speaking for unity in one of the largest, most deeply spiritual cities of the world". Same message, negative buzzword avoided. The muslims in this town know what he's talking about, the rest of the world thinks he means Jerusalem and the right has nothing to bite onto, when they attack him for this.
Instead of "reaching out to muslims", try "embracing all peoples of faith and ending hateful stereotypes of recent years". Again, the muslims know exactly who you're talking about, without naming them. Everyone else thinks you mean whatever group they personally see as the oppressed.
I think the president-elect absolutely SHOULD be sworn in with his full name. Every president before him has done the same thing. And if it sends a message, then that message is "my heritage is nothing to be ashamed of and by suggesting otherwise, you reveal your own predjudices". And that's message enough.
Let's hope that the right-wing media misses this. Let's hope that they're focused on Blago and his problems and misses this completely. The last thing I want to see are the dying elephants of the right-wing hate-media, whipping the ignorant up into a dangerous, fearful fury. That's about as counter-productive an action as I can imagine, right now.
Cheers all,
Mr.B

No comments:
Post a Comment